Co-creating a research-based e-storybook for children coping with parental moral injury: insights from affected communities and partners
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study provided an account of the affected community and partner (stakeholders) input into the interdisciplinary co-creation process and preliminary testing of the suitability of a research-based e-storybook for children coping with parental moral injury. Children whose parents have trauma-related mental health difficulties, including moral injury, tend to misunderstand their parent’s responses and behaviours. To date, there have been no research-based narrative resources to support these children. Our interdisciplinary, international team of researchers, clinicians, and those with lived experience co-created a bibliotherapy storybook using moral injury narratives. Using a mixed methods approach, a cross-sectional online survey of key affected communities and partners was conducted to explore the resources’ suitability. Preliminary findings suggest overall suitability and that the e-storybook’s narratives acted as a springboard to conversations about what was happening in their families. Thus, the co-creation process is an effective approach to developing targeted supports for children coping with parental moral injury.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it